MODELS OF PERSONALITY

Forensic psychologists wishing to place personality at the center of

their thinking and practice need to adopt a systematic and coherent theory
of personality functioning that can serve as a guide to their conclusions. In
this chapter I focus on those theoretical formulations that have produced
the most debate and research and that have been most influential in the
practice of clinical psychology and, to some extent, in psychiatry as well.
These theories include Freud's psychoanalytic model, Jung's typological
theory, Cattell's Sixteen Personality Factor classification, Cloninger's psy-
chobiological model, the five-factor model, and Millon's bioevolutionary
model. I also comment on the extent to which these theories are likely to
be applicable and relevant to forensic psychological practice.

THEORETICAL MODELS OF PERSONALITY CLASSIFICATION

Efforts to classify personality date back at least to the four humoral

patterns identified by Hippocrates. The workgroups for the fourth edition of
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV; American
Psychiatric Association, 1994) allegedly took an atheoretical approach to
the classification of personality disorders and codified 11 such entities into
three clusters. The AnxiouS'Fearful group is composed of the histrionic,
narcissistic, antisocial, and borderline disorders. The Dramatic group consists

39
of avoidant, dependent, compulsive, and passive-aggressive disorders. Finally,
the Odd or Eccentric group is characterized by schizoid, schizotypal, and
paranoid disorders.
There have been a myriad of complaints about the DSM-IV personality
disorder section, especially that it lacks a dimensional approach to the
understanding and classification of personality disorders; that there is exten-
sive criteria overlap, resulting in patients meeting the diagnostic threshold
for multiple disorders; and that there is possible gender bias in the criteria
(Widiger, in press). Also, some have lamented that the classification system
lacks a theoretical foundation.
Between the inelegant musings of Hippocrates and the atheoretical
musings of official psychiatric classifications are many proposals to classify
personality and personality disorders. And there are many scattered ap-
proaches to understanding human behavior. For example, there are psycho-
dynamic theories, exemplified by the ego analysts and object relational
approaches to studying personality. There are dispositional theories, such
as trait approaches, typological approaches (Jung), and psychological need
theories (Murray, Maslow, Gough). There are learning theory approaches,
such as classical (Pavlov), operant (Skinner), and social learning foci (Ban-
dura), that understand personality in terms of the rewards and punishments
of behavior in certain environments. There are phenomenological theories
of personality (Rogers, Kelly) and integrationists (Magnussen). There are
only a few theory-driven models of personality classification that are dimen-
sional in nature; Millon's bioevolutionary theory appears to have the best
fit for understanding both personality and personality disorders and how
these interact and help explain behavior that pertains to forensic assessment.

FREUD'S PSYCHOANALYTIC MODEL

Overview

Sigmund Freud became convinced that personality was formed from

the interaction of biological needs with people and relationships at the
earliest stages of development. This interaction normally involves the
mother but can emanate from any consistent caregiver. Freud also became
convinced that unconscious forces play a dominant role in helping to shape
personality. He theorized that personality develops through successive stages
of psychosexual activity, which he labeled oral, anal, phallic, and genital,
associated with the "erogenous zones." Freud did not use the term personality
disorders but rather referred to them as character types.

40 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

 In classical Freudian theory, the oral stage is from birth to about two
years of age. Children at this stage gratify their needs through sucking and
biting, so he labeled this the oral stage. If a child's development becomes
fixated at this stage, then he or she is said to have an oral personality. If
the fixation occurs at the oral-incorporative stage, then the personality is
overdependent and emotionally immature, with an exaggerated need for
praise and undue reliance on dominant others to take care of them. People
with an oral-incorporative personality tend to be submissive, subservient,
and acquiescent and to have a weak self-image. This stage might apply to
the depressive, dependent, and masochistic personality disorders. If the
fixation occurs at the oral-aggressive stage, the person's behavior is character-
ized by oral aggression expressed through verbal hostility, sarcasm, and
petulance; feelings of deprivation; and gullibility. Children fixated at this
later stage are considered to be oral-sadistic.
The anal stage is generally from two to three years of age, when the
anus becomes the focus of attention, particularly through toilet training
practices. If fixation occurs in the anal-expulsive stage, then the person is
negative and disorderly but ambitious. If parents are strict or harsh in their
training methods, the child may hold back feces. Children who become
fixated at this stage are anal-retentive and develop personalities that are
overly concerned with cleanliness or perhaps excessive saving and hoarding.
They develop a cluster of behavior patterns associated with compulsive
behaviors. They act in an excessively dutiful and obedient manner, focusing
on productivity, reliability, meticulousness, efficiency, and rigid adherence
to societal rules and regulations so as to not displease a feared significant
other, who unconsciously represents the harsh toilet-training caregiver dur-
ing the anal phase. The personality disorder of obsessive-compulsive is
theorized to occur from fixations at this stage.
During the fourth and fifth years of age, the oedipus compkx (for boys)
and the electra complex (for girls) begin to develop. The child feels an
unconscious sexual attraction toward the parent of the opposite gender and
wants to possess him or her. Castration anxiety in boys and penis envy in
girls may result in problems arising from phallic fixations. The child may
experience rejection, disappointment, and depression, which can affect his
or her sense of self and even sexual identity and lead to impaired interpersonal
relationships as adults.
The genital stage occurs with the onset of puberty and continues into
adulthood. (The ages between six years and puberty are called the latency
period because of a lack of sexual development in the analytic sense.) With
adolescence comes the need to develop mature relationships, select a voca-
tion, become socialized, and select a mate. This model of psychosexual
development is portrayed in Table 2.1.

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 41
 TABLE 2.1
Classical Freudian Theory on Stages of Psychosexual Development
Stage of
psychosexual
development Erogenous zone Main activity Personality development
Oral Mouth Sucking, biting Oral-incorporative
(dependent)
Oral-aggressive (sadistic)
Anal Anus Withholding Anal-retentive or anal-
expulsive (compulsive)
Phallic Genital organs Masturbation, Oedipal behaviors,
autoeroticism over- or
undersexualized
Genital Genitals Sexual desire, Mature adult behavior
sexual relations

Unfortunately for theory, classification, and model building, Freud had

no interest in using his theories to develop a typology of character structures
and spent most of his efforts at developing his method of personality
change—psychoanalysis.

Applicability to Forensic Assessment

Although it is possible to maintain a psychodynamic orientation to

understand the motivation of offenders, it is more problematic to use this
formulation to diagnose a given individual. We can discuss patient behaviors
in terms of such concepts as oral deprivation and oral fixation, but it is far
more difficult to use these traits in a diagnostic sense. They represent theoret-
ical constructs that remain problematic in terms of jury testimony, and they
do not lead to categorical diagnoses consistent with current nosology (e.g.,
the DSM-IV). These terms remain popular within the fields of psychiatry
and psychology, but they are used more as shorthand references that subsume
a wide array of behaviors and traits in a terse label.

JUNG'S TYPOLOGICAL THEORY

Overview

Jung (1990) diverged from Freud's thinking in several dimensions. He

believed that sexual and aggressive forces are instrumentally related to early
personality development and that past childhood trauma is substantially

42 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

less significant in shaping subsequent personality. Instead, he stressed present
problems and conflicts and argued that individuation (psychological matura-
tion) is a continuing and lifelong process. Although he believed in an
unconscious, he also believed that there is a "collective unconscious" that
consists of ancient cultural memories that form archetypes. Archetypes are
master patterns, such as "mother," "father," "hero," and so forth that are
transmitted from generation to generation. To understand the meaning of
these archetypes within an individual, Jung used both psychoanalysis and
dream interpretation. (He also tried word association tests but later aban-
doned them.)
Jung believed that personality is a dynamically interactive construct.
He developed a personality typology according to how people "prefer" to
use their minds. Of course, some of these preferences can be outside of
consciousness. Fundamental to personality are the concepts of Extroversion
(E) and Introversion (I), and one or the other assumes a dominant function
in behavior. He also argued that there are four psychic functions: thought,
feelings, sensation, and intuition. These psychic functions interact with
extroversion—introversion and refer to how a person is energized. The two
modes of perceiving, Sensation (S) and Intuition (N), pertain to what a
person pays attention to. The Thinking (T)-Feeling (F) dichotomy reflects
two different ways of judging and making decisions. Finally, the Judgment
(J) and Perception (P) types reflect the preference for judging or perceiving
in how people tend to live their lives.
Extroverted people focus their attention on external objects and are
concerned with relations with other people. They get their psychic energy
from the outside world. They are very involved with people, enjoy interacting
with them, and tend to be very action oriented and become impatient with
slow jobs and slow-working people. They seem energetic and enthusiastic.
They like to express ideas and seek opportunities to make an impact. The
introverted type is more concerned about inner psychological processes.
They get their psychic energy more from solitary activities. They like to
work through ideas with much concentration and reflection. They do not
mind working alone on a project and can tolerate long periods without
interruptions. They like to think before expressing their ideas and tend to
restrain expressions of enthusiasm.
The Sensation (or Sensing) type prefers direct observation through
the five senses. People with this personality type are very practical and rely
on facts and established procedures. They tend to prefer a step-by-step
approach and to rely on what they already know to be true. They like
evidence and depend on insights as well as on their own experience. The
Intuition (or Intuitive) type prefers to go beyond the senses to look for
meaning, innovation, change, and potentialities. They like novelty and

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 43
enjoy theoretical possibilities. They rely on a "sixth sense." Jung theorized
that those in creative and imaginative professions mostly preferred the
Intuitive type of perceiving.
The Thinking type arrives at judgments through rational and logical
methods. Such people rely on justice, principles, reason, objectivity, and
rationality. They may not pay enough attention to the feelings of others.
Although fair-minded, they tend to be critical. The Feeling type seeks
information through activities characterized by warmth, harmony, com-
passion, and affiliation with others. They reason from the heart and are
sympathetic. They avoid criticizing others. Usually they have good people
skills.
People who are high on the Judgment preference, which addresses
how people come to conclusions, want things to be planned and orderly.
They tend to be settled and controlled. They are organized and decisive.
Their lives seem quite regulated. They want to get things done and seem
to want structure and schedules. They dislike surprises. Those who prefer
the Perception (or Perceiving) function—which addresses how people take
in ideas and how they become aware of people and events—prefer flexibility
and to keep their lives open to other possibilities. They adapt easily and
let life happen. They seem to enjoy last-minute changes and surprise turns
of events. They dislike deadlines.
Jung's psychological or personality types have been operationalized
in the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers & McCaulley, 1992).
According to theory, then, and as exemplified by the MBTI, one pole of a
pair is preferred over the other pole, resulting in 16 possible combinations
or "types." One's preference in each of the four functions is given an alphabet-
ical code. For example, an ENTJ is an extrovert who uses intuition with
thinking and judgment. Such people would be characterized as logical,
organized, objective, and decisive; provide structure to themselves and to
others; tend to be leaders; and are action oriented, efficient, structured,
and tough. They may, however, overlook people's needs and may act in a
domineering manner. Jung's typology of characterological types is detailed
in Exhibit 2.1.

Applicability to Forensic Practice

Jung's typology and its operational measure, the MBTI, would seem
to have limited applicability in forensic practice. The MBTI is immense-
ly popular in business, education, and to some extent marital counseling,
but it has not been used in forensic assessment and is not likely to be
used in the future. Its main applicability has been in nonforensic
settings.

44 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

 EXHIBIT 2.1
Jung's Typology of Characterological Types
(E) Extroversion (I) Introversion
Focuses on outer world; draws Prefers inner world of ideas and
energy from external sources and impressions; draws energy from
people own internal world
(S) Sensing (N) Intuition
Prefers to gain information primarily Prefers to think about patterns and
through the senses and what is possibilities; considers what "might
actual be"
(T) Thinking (F) Feeling
Bases decisions on logic, rationality, Bases decisions on evaluation
cause-and-effect relationships,
objectivity; prefers to organize and
structure information
(J) Judgment (P) Perception
Likes planned and organized Prefers spontaneity and flexibility
approaches to life; seeks closure

CATTELL'S SIXTEEN PERSONALITY FACTOR MODEL

Overview

Trait theorist Raymond B. Cattell studied, dimenstonalized, and tested

his system for personality classification for more than 40 years (see R. B.
Cattell, 1989). He used the method of factor analysis to refine more than
4,000 adjectives into what he considered the most meaningful, nonredun-
dant descriptions of personality, which he labeled factors (Craig, 1999a)
and operationalized in the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF;
R. B. Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1970a; Russell, Karol, Cattell, Cattell, &
Cattell, 1994). Cattell argued that there are 16 primary factors, sometimes
referred to as source traits, on which to align personality. Cattell believed
that these source traits underlie surface traits. These source dimensions then
are alleged to parsimoniously represent all possible types of personalities.
Although Cattell believed that these factors represent the primary
descriptors for categorizing and describing people, subsequent investigators
have found a way to further refine these 16 factors into the global or second-
order factors of Extroversion, Anxiety, Tough-Mindedness, Independence,
and Self-Control (Karson, Karson, & O'Dell, 1997). These factors are quite
similar to the five-factor model discussed later in this chapter and are
independent and bipolar dimensions. Cattell's factors and source traits are
presented in Table 2.2.

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 45
 TABLE 2.2
Cattell's Source Traits
Source trait extremes
Factor Low High
A Warmth Reserved Warm
B Reasoning Concrete thinking Abstract thinking
C Emotional Stability Affected by feelings Emotionally stable
E Dominance3 Submissive Dominant
F Liveliness Serious Enthusiastic
G Rule-Consciousness Expedient Conscientious
H Social Boldness Shy Bold
1 Sensitivity3 Tough-minded Sensitive
L Vigilance Trusting Suspicious
M Abstractedness Practical Imaginative
N Privateness Forthright Private
O Apprehension Self-assured Apprehensive
Q1 Openness to Change Conservative Experimenting
Q2 Self-Reliance Group-oriented Self-sufficient
Q3 Perfectionism Tolerates disorder Perfectionistic
Q4 Tension Relaxed Tense
'Factors D, J, and K did not replicate in adults.

Applicability to Forensic Assessments

The 16PF test has some use in forensic assessments, particularly in

assessing more normal clients such as police force applicants and some
fitness-for-duty examinations. It has also occasionally been used for custody
evaluations (see chap. 4, this volume). The test has rarely been used in
assessment of forensic clinical populations, such as sexual abusers, pain
patients, or abuse victims, nor has it been used in capital cases, and it has
never been used for other common forensic assessments (dangerousness,
insanity pleas). The test has evolved into more industrial applications and
to some extent for use in marital counseling and is likely to experience a
diminished role in forensic use in the future. Although the test has been
somewhat popular in selected settings, Cattell's model of personality factors
is rarely invoked as an explanatory construct.

CLONINGER'S PSYCHO-BIOLOGICAL MODEL

Overview

Cloninger (1987b; Cloninger, Svrakic, & Przybeck, 1993) developed

his theories from family studies, psychometric studies of personality, neuro-
pharmacologic and neuroanatomical studies, and studies of behavioral condi-

46 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

tioning and learning in humans and animals. He proposed a biosocial theory
of personality that seeks to integrate both genetic and environmental influ-
ences on personality.
He originally proposed a three-dimensional model, which theorized
that three fundamental dimensions of personality (Novelty Seeking, Harm
Avoidance, and Reward Dependence) are associated with three brain activi-
ties (behavioral activation, inhibition, and maintenance) and with three
neurotransmitters (dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine). He believed
that these are genetically independent dimensions of personality. He argued
that these basic factors apply to both normal and deviant traits and are
heritable personality traits.
He now has developed a seven-factor model that consists of the
three original factors plus four new ones (Persistence, Self-Directedness,
Cooperativeness, and Self-Transcendence). The first three factors are
believed to be biologically and genetically based, whereas the last four
are said to develop from one's self-concept (Cloninger & Svrakic, 1994).
The first three are personality traits and are assessed using the Tridimen-
sional Personality Questionnaire (Cloninger, 1987c; Cloninger, Przybeck,
& Svrakic, 1991). The last four are character traits and are assessed by
the Temperament and Character Inventory (Cloninger, Przybeck, Svrakic,
& Wetzel, 1997).
According to this model, novelty seeking is an inherited tendency
toward activation (e.g., exploratory activity) in response to novelty. It is
the tendency to be attracted to unfamiliar stimuli and is associated with
impulsive decision making, quick loss of temper, and extravagance in one's
approaches to the cues of rewards. It is theorized to be associated with low
basal activity in the dopaminergic system. The person high in novelty
seeking avoids monotony and routine, shows frequent exploratory behavior,
and is disposed to exhilaration and excitement. Such people are excitable,
distractible, impulsive, and extravagant.
Harm avoidance is theorized as an inherited tendency to escape situa-
tions that may be associated with punishment and leads the person to
inhibit behaviors to avoid punishment and frustrations. It is theorized to
be associated with high basal activity in the serotonergic system. These
personality types tend to be shy, passive, and easily fatigued and tend to
worry and to be pessimistic and fearful.
Reward dependence is characterized by strong reaction to reward,
including social approval, and greater resistance to the extinction of reward.
It is theorized to be associated with low basal activity in the noradrenergic
system. Personality traits include sentimentality, persistence, dependence,
and strong attachment to others and their approval. Again, it is presumed
to be inherited. These three dimensions interact with one another in every-
day behavior.

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 47
 Cloninger's model can be applied to understanding personality disor-
ders. For example, someone with antisocial personality disorder would be
described as low in harm avoidance and high in novelty seeking. The schizoid
and schizotypal personality disorders would be described as low in harm
avoidance, low in novelty seeking, and low in reward dependence (Clon-
inger, 2000). The model can also be applied to clinical syndromes. In his
highly referenced theory of alcoholism, Cloninger (1987a) proposed that
low novelty seeking, high harm avoidance, and high reward dependence
characterize Type I alcoholism. Type II alcoholism is characterized by high
novelty seeking, low harm avoidance, and low reward dependence. This
model has been more often used in psychiatric than in psychological research.
Research to date suggests that the dimensions of harm avoidance and
novelty seeking are psychometrically sound, but reward dependence seems
to comprise two other factors and is psychometrically weaker than the other
dimensions (Chen, Chen, Chen, Yu, & Chen, 2002). Also, factor analytic
studies often show that these hypothesized personality traits do not often
load on their underlying trait factor. The personality disorders generated
by the model conform only loosely to the DSM-IV types, and a number
are not represented at all (Millon, Meagher, & Grossman, 2001).

Applicability to Forensic Practice

Cloninger's theory has had influence in psychiatric research but has

had little influence in forensic issues. However, there is some evidence of
its utility in the assessment of violent and nonviolent offenders and of sexual
offenders, especially in assessing impulsivity and empathy (Nussbaum et al.,
2002). Cloninger's theory of genetic and inheritable traits may eventually
enter into attorney arguments and psychiatric expert testimony, but to date
little use has been made of either the theory or its operational measures in
forensic settings. This could change in the future (see chaps. 7 and 8,
this volume).

THE FIVE-FACTOR MODEL

Overview

The most influential personality classification model in terms of re-

search, debate, and range of applicability has been termed the five-factor
model (Digman, 1990). This theory holds that all personality dimensions
can be subsumed under five basic dimensions: Neuroticism, Extroversion,
Openness to Experience (sometimes called Intelligence or Culture), Agreeable-
ness, and Conscientiousness. This personality model has been operationalized

48 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

by the Neuroticism, Extroversion, Openness to Experience Personality
Inventory—Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). (Harkness &
McNulty, 1994, found a different set of factors, which they labeled Aggressive'
ness, Psychoticism, Constraint, Negative Emotionality/Neuroticism, and Positive
Emotionality/Extroversion. They termed this set the Psychopathology Five,
or the Psy'5.) The consistency with which this model has appeared in
personality trait research has led researchers to nickname this model the
Big Five.
Proponents argue that the usefulness of the five-factor model has been
demonstrated across instruments, populations, and cultures (Goldberg,
1981). Opponents of this model argue that the model is incomplete, superfi-
cial, and problematic when it comes to predicting external criteria other
than the testing situation itself (Block, 1995; McAdams, 1992). Another
problem with the five-factor model is that its description places more empha-
sis on normal personality than disordered personality. Although the model
recently has been applied to describing personality disorders (Costa & Widi-
ger, 2000; McCrae, 1991), proponents of this model would argue that it
does so rather awkwardly. For example, a psychopath might be described
as a person low in Agreeableness and Conscientiousness and high in Extro-
version and Openness to Experience, but this profile could also apply to
someone who enjoys bungee jumping, parasailing, and hang gliding and
who is not in any way psychopathic.

Applicability to Forensic Assessment

To date the five-factor model has been used in forensic assessments

of law enforcement applicants (especially relevant is the Conscientiousness
factor) and in child custody evaluations (see chaps. 3 and 4, this volume).
Researchers who prefer this model have been demonstrating its applicability
to the assessment of personality disorders with some success (Costa &
Widiger, 2000). Given that personality disorders are a critical fact in many
forensic matters, the use of the theoretical model's operational measures,
such as the NEO—PI—R, is likely to increase in forensic applications in the
future. However, the theoretical model itself is not likely to be invoked
in testimony.

MILLON'S BIOEVOLUTIONARY MODEL

Overview

Cattell was interested in developing personality taxonomies of traits

rather than personality styles and did not describe how these personality

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 49
traits evolve into personality disorders (Strack&Lorr, 1997). Millon(1990),
on the other hand, developed a parsimonious model of personality develop-
ment, anchored by both evolutionary and ecological theory, that offers a
taxonomy of both normal and disordered personality types.
Millon argued that there are four "polarities" that are central to evolu-
tionary and ecological theory; these are existence, adaptation, replication,
and abstraction. Millon used the first three spheres to develop a theoretical
model of personality development and personality classification, but his
model continues to develop and individuate, and he presently is beginning
to explore ways to integrate the Abstraction sphere into his model.
He persuasively argued that the first task of evolution in a species is
to maintain Existence. At the biological level organisms do this by making
efforts to enhance their lives, thereby increasing survivability and countering
entropic disintegration, or merely to preserve their lives by avoiding events
that might terminate life. At the psychological level humans can enhance
their lives by seeking pleasurable experiences that are rewarding and avoiding
experiences that are punishing.
After one's existence has been ensured, the next evolutionary task is
that of Adaptation—the second polarity. Organisms can merely accommo-
date to their surroundings and fit in, or they can modify the environment,
thereby increasing their chances of survival. At the psychological level, the
latter strategy represents an active versus a passive way of adapting.
Once existence has been ensured and the organism has adapted to its
environment, the third task of an organism is Replication—the third polar-
ity. Replication ensures the continued existence of a species. By reproducing,
a biological strategy that is focused on oneself, the organism produces off-
spring, which require nurturance for continued existence, a strategy that
focuses on others. Thus, at the psychological level, a person can focus only
on the self, or the person can focus on helping others. Millon believed that
these three polarities are the foundation for personality development. (He
recently added Abstraction as a fourth polarity but has yet to develop it
further in terms of personality schema.)
He proposed three axes—pleasure-pain, active-passive, and self-
other—as the basic building blocks of both normal personality styles and
personality disorders. The model crosses the active-passive axis with five
reinforcement strategies, leading to basic personality styles of detached,
dependent, independent, ambivalent, and discordant. This results in a 5 X 2
matrix of 10 theoretically derived personality types plus three severe person-
ality disorders, as presented in Table 2.3. Normal personalities have a good
balance of the three polarities, whereas disordered personalities are imbal-
anced in one or more of the polarities. His theory, then, derives personality
disordered types but also is able to characterize normal personality styles,
as presented in Table 2.3. He argued that personality disorders are mere

50 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

 TABLE 2.3
Millon's Theory-Derived Personality Classification
Instrumental Sources of reinforcement
behavior
patterns Independent Dependent Ambivalent Discordant Detached
Active
Normal Unruly Sociable Sensitive Forceful Inhibited
Disordered Antisocial Histrionic Negativistic Aggressive Avoidant

Passive
Normal Confident Cooperative Respectful Defeatist Introversive
Disordered Narcissistic Dependent Compulsive Self-defeating Schizoid
depressive
Severe Paranoid or Borderline Borderline Borderline Schizotypal
variants borderline or paranoid or paranoid or paranoid

extensions of the basic personality types that decompensate in the presence

of environmental stress or compromised biology.
Millon's theory of personality pathology can thus be applied both to
the official nosology of personality disorders and to those personality disorders
generated by the model but not contained in the DSM-IV. The model
description is explicated by using the term dominant to mean fixated in an
analytic sense or reinforced in the behavioral sense. Although the meaning
of dominant is not exactly conveyed by such words as fixated and reinforced,
it does convey a sense of the term's meaning for personality function and
is closer to the meaning of dominant function developed by Jung, as described
in the MBTI test.
Millon's model, as applied to DSM—IV categories as well as to those
generated by the model itself, is presented in Table 2.4. The dominant
function of the polarity is presented in bold type, and deficits appear in
italics. If a personality is dominant in one part of the axis (e.g., passive),
then it is deficient in the other part of the axis (e.g., active).
The structurally deficient personality disorders are schizotypal, border-
line, and paranoid. They can be classified as active or passive. The schizotypal
is deficient or weak on all polarities. The borderline is conflicted on all
polarities. The paranoid is average on all polarities and is intractable and
largely unalterable.
Millon also developed a descriptive model for understanding personal-
ity pathology using structural and functional domain criteria in the behavior,
phenomenological, intrapsychic, and biophysical categories. Across these
two planes are the functional domains of expressive acts, interpersonal
conduct, cognitive style, and regulatory mechanisms and the structural do-
mains of object representations, self-image, morphologic organization, and

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 51
 TABLE 2.4
Millon's Schematic of Personality Pathology According to the
Bioevolutionary Polarity Model
Survival aims Adaptive modes Replication strategies
Personality
disorder Pain Pleasure Passive Active Self Other
Schizoid Deficit Deficit Dominant Deficit Dominant Average
Avoidant Dominant Deficit Weak Dominant Weak Weak
Depressive Deficit Dominant Dominant Weak Weak Weak
Dependent Average Average Dominant Weak Deficit Dominant
Histrionic Average Average Deficit Dominant Average Dominant
Narcissistic Average Weak Dominant Weak Dominant Deficit
Antisocial Average Weak Weak Dominant Dominant Deficit
Aggressive/ Average Dominant Weak Dominant Average Weak
Sadistic
Compulsive Deficit Average Dominant Weak Weak Average
Passive- Deficit Average Average Dominant Average Weak
Aggressive
(negativistic)
Self-Defeating Weak Dominant Dominant Average Deficit Average
Schizotypal Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit
Borderline Average Average Average Average Average Average
Paranoid Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak

Note. Dominant on polarity in bold type, weak on polarity underlined, average on polarity in normal type,
and deficit on polarity in italics.

mood or temperament. Each personality disorder can thus be described using

these categories for explication.
Millon's approach is called a "prototype" approach whose categories
represent the "pure" case of the disorder. Of course, pure cases exist only
in theory and in textbooks, whereas, in nature, various blends result in
slight variations of the prototype. (For further information regarding Millon's
model of personality disorder, the reader is referred to his most recent
thoughts on the matter; Millon & Davis, 1997.)
Millon developed instrumentation to assess his theorized types for
both clinical and nonclinical populations. This theoretical model and its
operational measures have generated a substantial amount of research (Craig,
1997; Millon, 1997) and continue to play an influential role in present-day
clinical psychology. Millon's theory, in fact, was the proximate cause of
having the avoidant personality disorder included in the third edition of
the DSM (American Psychiatric Association, 1987) and in subsequent revi-
sions and in introducing the multiaxial system.

Applicability to Forensic Practice

The tools Millon developed as operational measures of his theoretical

types—especially the MCMI-III (and prior versions), styles, and disorders—

52 PERSONALITY-GUIDED FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

are increasingly being used by forensic psychologists. Much of this applica-
tion is presented in later chapters of this book. The MCMI in particular
has generated a substantial amount of research and has demonstrated much
validity across a variety of populations and clinical applications (Millon,
1997). Among self-report measures, it has become the instrument of choice
when evaluating for personality disorders.
Models of personality configurations and classifications are beginning
to be tested empirically, and psychologists can look forward to increasingly
sophisticated analyses to test the models' basic postulates (O'Connor &
Dyce, 1998). Whether or not one adopts a particular model of personality
development and personality pathology, the categories of personality type
and the instruments to assess them will be extremely valuable in forensic
work. Nevertheless, throughout the remaining chapters of this volume,
Millon's theory of personality pathology is used as the permeating theory
in which to understand behavior (personality) disorders.

MODELS OF PERSONALITY 53